Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
SINGAPORE -- Singapore Airlines has completed the world's longest commercial passenger flight, touching down in Newark, New Jersey after a flight of more than 18.5 hours from Singapore.
The airline used an Airbus A340-500 configured to carry 181 passengers on the ultra long-haul route of more than 16,600 kilometers (about 10,000 miles) over the North Pacific.
Passengers of fully-booked flight SQ22 boarded the plane in Singapore at midday on Monday to the strains of Frank Sinatra's "New York, New York," landing in New York's Newark airport on Monday evening.
It has additional space in both economy and business class, with passengers able to access a self-service snack area, as well as a place to mingle and stretch their legs.
The non-stop flight saves up to four hours in travel time over the airline's previous Singapore-New York service, which made a refueling stopover in Amsterdam.
The new flight beats the current longest flight both in terms of flying time and distance covered, an airline spokeswoman told The Associated Press.
The previous record was also held by Singapore Airlines for its Los Angeles service, which covers the 14,762 kilometers (9,173 miles) in 16 hours, she said.
The airline placed a $2.2 billion order in 1998 for 10 Airbus A340-500s in 1998 -- five on firm order and five on option, along with associated spare parts and engines. The aircraft is powered by four Rolls-Royce Trent 553 engines.
Dave
|
Jambo
Member
Registered: 8th Sep 01
Location: Maidenhead, Drives: VXR Arctic
User status: Offline
|
that the new one, double decker stylee?
Apparently boeing/airbus are having problems designin new planes as most are too big to fit on current runways 
|
RichR
Premium Member
Registered: 17th Oct 01
Location: Waterhouses, Staffordshire
User status: Offline
|
my sisters boyfriend builds the engines for them 
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
no its not. A380 (double decker) is still going through engine certification using an A340 testbed. Will be end of 2005 before its ready to fly. This is an A340-500, a 2nd generation A340 with unsurpassed fuel economy and efficiency. Rolls Royce Trent engines power it, and 6 1st and 2nd officers to fly it !!
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jambo
that the new one, double decker stylee?
Apparently boeing/airbus are having problems designin new planes as most are too big to fit on current runways
No there are no current problems like this. The undercarriages are specially designed to spread the weight when landing, and with 4 70,000lb thrust engines underneath, the A380 is going to have more than enough power. A jumbo has 4 engines with 40,000lb thrust. As for dimensions, most international airports have now made modifications to gates and taxiways to accomodate much larger aircraft.
|
Jambo
Member
Registered: 8th Sep 01
Location: Maidenhead, Drives: VXR Arctic
User status: Offline
|
Any pics of this deck where the passengers get to mingle. I can only imagine this to be fucking awfull on any flight involving english people
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by LiVe LeE
my sisters boyfriend builds the engines for them
Builds the engines for what?
|
ed
Member
Registered: 10th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jambo
Any pics of this deck where the passengers get to mingle. I can only imagine this to be fucking awfull on any flight involving english people
No its not a deck, its a small area at the rear of the plane where people are allowed to stand and chat, which is against most airline policies at the moment. Singapore airlines are an exception to the rule on this service only.
|
Jambo
Member
Registered: 8th Sep 01
Location: Maidenhead, Drives: VXR Arctic
User status: Offline
|
should stay that way.
Can see it only a matter of time before some fuckin ned opens one of the hatches at 35,000 feet.
Nice idea tho, u heard of the plans for the "flying wing"
|
RichR
Premium Member
Registered: 17th Oct 01
Location: Waterhouses, Staffordshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cybermonkey24
quote:
Originally posted by LiVe LeE
my sisters boyfriend builds the engines for them
Builds the engines for what?
rolls royce aerospace - the trent engines etc
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
A340-300 with A380 Rolls Royce engine installed as part of flight testing!
Record Breaking A340-500
The prototype A380 being rolled out last week for the first time! ITs huuuuuge!!
Dave
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by LiVe LeE
quote:
Originally posted by Cybermonkey24
quote:
Originally posted by LiVe LeE
my sisters boyfriend builds the engines for them
Builds the engines for what?
rolls royce aerospace - the trent engines etc
Aaah ok cool.The trent engine is impressive, but not as impressive as the latest GE offerings. They still got the record for most powerful commercial engine, 105,000lb's of thrust!!
|
RichR
Premium Member
Registered: 17th Oct 01
Location: Waterhouses, Staffordshire
User status: Offline
|
that first pic above - how do they counter balance the mass of the engines -as one wing is surely massively heavier and would cuse probels - and from a testing point of view having to add counter balances would mean that the true potential of the engines wasnt being tested
|
Jambo
Member
Registered: 8th Sep 01
Location: Maidenhead, Drives: VXR Arctic
User status: Offline
|
That thing is massive. Can carry loads people.
Flying wing is supposed to have sky lights and no windows on the side and be a basic wing shape, no fusalage meaning loadsa space and more rigid structure apparently.
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jambo
should stay that way.
Can see it only a matter of time before some fuckin ned opens one of the hatches at 35,000 feet.
Nice idea tho, u heard of the plans for the "flying wing"
Opens the hatches?? he wouldnt know how to which flying wing? airbus, bombardier and boeing have been producing so many concepts its hard to keep up. The Boeing 7E7 should be ready for 2007. Boeing have got the right idea, 300 passengers at 0.88mach to reduce journey times, unlike airbus who are trying to squeeze 700 people onto one aircraft
Dave
|
Jambo
Member
Registered: 8th Sep 01
Location: Maidenhead, Drives: VXR Arctic
User status: Offline
|
just noticed that, that on throttle bodies
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by LiVe LeE
that first pic above - how do they counter balance the mass of the engines -as one wing is surely massively heavier and would cuse probels - and from a testing point of view having to add counter balances would mean that the true potential of the engines wasnt being tested
lol its not a problem really. the whole point is to test the systems of the engine rather than performance. They counterbalance weight of the engine by putting more fuel in the lighter wing on the opposite side of the aircraft. Performance testing is done on the ground, and eventually on the prototype when its ready to fly
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
its quite a standard practice over the world, its not unknown for an aircraft to carry more engines under a wing for delivery purposes to another country, another reason for the engine testing above is to test the rigidity of the pylon that supports the engine. Very important that it can sufficiently hold the weight and stress during takeoff, turbulence etc etc
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jambo
That thing is massive. Can carry loads people.
Flying wing is supposed to have sky lights and no windows on the side and be a basic wing shape, no fusalage meaning loadsa space and more rigid structure apparently.
I can assure you its just a concept, you wont see aircraft like that for years yet
|
Jambo
Member
Registered: 8th Sep 01
Location: Maidenhead, Drives: VXR Arctic
User status: Offline
|
i know that.
Was just stating how its evolving in ideas/concept pricesses and how then ew planes wont look like the ones we recognise
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
yeah its very interesting, but at the moment, with materials, costs and production, the most economically viable design is the one we see today, infact the 777 is the pinnacle of aircraft design at the moment, and soon to be the 7E7.
|
Black Corsa SRi
Member
Registered: 25th May 02
Location: ---Stockport---- Drives: Pug 206 Roland Garros
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cybermonkey24
yeah its very interesting, but at the moment, with materials, costs and production, the most economically viable design is the one we see today, infact the 777 is the pinnacle of aircraft design at the moment, and soon to be the 7E7.
not saying you are wrong, as after all its a matter of opinion but most pilots i talk to would much rather fly an Airbus, and I as an enginer would rather work Airbus just simply cuase the design concets and ease of use and the fact the computers can do so much for you compared to boeing
|
3CorsaMeal
Member
Registered: 11th Apr 02
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cybermonkey24
yeah its very interesting, but at the moment, with materials, costs and production, the most economically viable design is the one we see today, infact the 777 is the pinnacle of aircraft design at the moment, and soon to be the 7E7.
what a load of bollox
|
chanel
Member
Registered: 27th Jan 04
User status: Offline
|
thought the 747 was considered "best"
Nicest ive flown in, way nicer than 777 absorbs turbulance, comfier seats in economy
|
